the multiverse

Post Reply New Topic

The multiverse could exist which includes several (perhaps an infinite number of) universes including our universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

Fantasy constructs. A "Multiverse" is postulated only to resolve certain quantum effects that no one has yet been able to explain otherwise, even though the explanation may be right in front of them.

It's like claiming that the "real" murderer of Nicole Simson could be any number of unknown people because it's the "only" way to explain how her murder occured ... since OJ Simpson "obviously" had nothing to do with it.

Multiverse... that's the repository in Ubuntu that contains non-free software, right?

If this universe is the only 1, what caused it to come into existence?

{Actually, even if there's 'always been' a universe or multiverse of some kind, it's tempting to still ask why there's ever been anything at all!}

Asking why the universe exists is probably asking the wrong question.

if every time we make a decision, we create a universe, then we'd all be God...

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But then, I can't refute it, eithe.

So your argument is: While everything within the universe has an explanation, the universe as a whole has none?

Sorry I'm unconvinced; on the other hand, no1 can ever know for sure whether that argument is right or wrong, further to why there apparently is a reality of some kind, or why that reality is as it is.

Questions that can never be answered, but not questions that can't have answers

A question is wrong if it is non sequitur.

Is a telephone ordinal?

Is a block chronological?

hmm...that raises an incardinate number of questions...

I don't believe in a multiverse.

With one exception, if we were able to time travel (which is impossible) or else you would have hydrogen thats going 198% the speed of light traveling through time to smite us all. (Look up a black hole) Remember speed is determined by comparing the rate at which one object is moving away from another so if you compare the two streams to each other then they easily surpass the speed of light and yet no time travel.

E = mc2 if matter is energy and light is energy then light is matter, if light is matter thats going the speed of light then shouldn't it time travel?

contradictions with the most basic of formulas is just lame. Stick to whats been proven. I've just shown 2 contradictions to the theory that going past the speed of light will make you travel through time.

Also remember if there was a multiverse it would be more than just your decisions, every time you moved, every time you didnt move, every millisecond you would create an infinite number of universes every time you blink you create a thousand more, slight difference would be calculated in as well as large.

Sorry if I got the wrong definition of multiverse, I was going off of what other people were saying, also as far as time travel is concerned I believe it would be exactly as in DBZ, YOUR timeline wont be affected, only the x-verse go to is. (Someone put some major thought into that, simply as a way to get around the anomalies such as if you cause yourself not to be born you wouldnt be able to go back and stop yourself from being born kind of anomalies)

That it does, that it does.

Your argument looks like what philosophers (and Wikipedia) call 'special pleading' -In this case, it seems that if a question calls your view of the world into question, it automatically makes no sense, even when you ask the same question (i.e. why?) in the context of all other similarly-physical objects? {I'm not even making a categorical error here as far as I can tell}

Also, on a second glance, your second question {'Is a block chronological?'} does make sense, when you consider the block's trajectory through time. I don't know what 'ordinal' means and don't have a dictionary to hand, so I'll leave that aside for now.

Calling questions 'wrong' conjures up images of medieval preists condemning the 'wrong questions' as blasphemous. {The Buddha had a better idea, claiming that asking the sort of questions we're asking would lead to madness }

Sorry if I'm missing something; I linked to this thread from the start screen - Not being a scientist, I never visit this forum, so feel free to explain any recent scientific proof that the universe is uncaused.

I once read an argument that the universe was caused by quantum inevitability alone, and remain open to the possibility that it needed no cause

A block is a unit, not an animate object like wood. A block of wood is animate because it is composed of the animate object, "wood".

Actually it has nothing to do with human decision making. The multiverse theory states that every time a quantum event occurs all possible outcomes occur simultaneously and branch off into different "versions" of the universe of which we can only perceive one at any given time. Those variations in events at a quantum level may eventually lead to macroscopic level differences which cause a human being to make a different choice but the act of making a choice doesn't actually cause anything. It's the effect of a multiverse not the cause.

Excellent story by sci-fi writer Greg Egan using this theory: Singleton. It's available online. http://www.gregegan.net/

This thread seems to be suited to the PPR forum as well.

Was he found guilty of it on trial in the end?

Well, there is a difference, with a case like the OJ Simpson thing, you could prove a positive as well as a negative, and when it comes to all of the multiverse hypothesis, can they all be empirically refuted?